EPILOGUE 447

that demanded substantially higher levels of mathematics and abstraction.3 Many new students quickly entered those newly highlighted fields, and postgraduation job opportunities seemed nearly unlimited. The goal of human landings on the Moon was soon reached, pride and enthusiasm ran high, scientists and engineers exulted in high public esteem, and young people clamored for a chance to join in the excitement and challenge.

Since then, the enthusiasm for space exploration has substantially ebbed, as public attention became increasingly redirected to the civil rights movement, the Vietnam War, and a growing concern about our environment. At least to some extent, ma­terialism and commercialism have replaced some of the sense of adventure that accompanied the early foray into space. The almost worshipful public regard for sci­entists and engineers diminished as a growing realization developed that science and technology could not solve all of society’s ills.

Fewer physics students are entering our universities today. The building of the International Space Station has not engendered the kind of widespread public excite­ment that accompanied the “race to the Moon.” Yet the fascination with “reaching out” to discover our physical surroundings continues to capture substantial public interest.

Humankind’s development from its primitive beginnings has progressed through a remarkably small number of truly defining events. The development of language and the resulting expanding social consciousness contributed to the realization that there were opportunities beyond the basic survival needs of each individual. In the same way that individuals began to look outside themselves, the Greeks, Near Easterners, Nicolaus Copernicus, and others questioned the concept that the Earth and its human inhabitants were the center of the universe. Charles Robert Darwin and, simultane­ously, Alfred Russel Wallace effectively publicized their beliefs that living things on the Earth developed over a long period by a series of very small evolutionary steps.

There has been a long-standing and deep-seated belief that Earth is unique within the universe as being the only home for life—that is, substance with the ability to reproduce. Although we may eventually find that to be true, with the knowledge being accumulated today, that belief is being challenged. There is a growing realization that life just possibly might have developed in other star systems and galaxies as well as on Earth.

The first conclusive discovery of life in any form anywhere else than on Earth will rank in importance with the major defining events mentioned above. Even though it is highly unlikely that life will have evolved elsewhere in the same way that it has on Earth, the discovery of individual living cells of any kind will bring about another

OPENING SPACE RESEARCH

fundamental and pervasive change in our thinking about humankind’s place in the scheme of things.

The first 50 years in space, in spite of its remarkable accomplishments, has opened only a small window to a greater understanding of our remarkable universe, and to a greatly increased awareness of humankind’s place in it.

[1] made a side trip while on the East Coast. Significant satellite-related design work was under way at the Signal Corps Engineering Laboratories at Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, and I went there to learn about it. I learned of their work on developing state-of-the-art power sources and transistor power converters.

That work looked so promising that I returned two months later for further discus­sions. Their engineers gave me a general briefing on primary power sources that might be used in our package, including silver-zinc, silver-cadmium, nickel-cadmium, solid electrolyte, nuclear, and solar cell sources. We also discussed their work on transistor power converters at considerable length, and they gave me a copy of a report that summarized their development efforts.22 Those discussions and that report gave me

[2] was dealing with another difficult issue during the week of 28 October. Everyone agreed that my presence would be needed at JPL if we were to prepare the two instrument packages in the short time available. Eb Rechtin suggested that JPL could hire me and move my family to Pasadena for the duration. The terms seemed reasonable. I felt truly crippled, however, because of Van Allen’s absence. He and I had no opportunity to discuss the many important practical matters and long-term implications of such a move. Ernie Ray, as acting department head, did not believe that he had the authority to approve my remaining a University of Iowa employee, in residence at JPL.

[3] was especially anxious to arrive home to see how my very pregnant wife was pro­gressing. I was greatly relieved to find that Rosalie’s father, the Reverend Loyal H. Vickers, had been staying with her. He stayed on for some time and pro­vided wonderful physical and moral assistance as Rosalie struggled to maintain the house and oversee the two children while I was so completely occupied at the laboratory.

Two days after my return, as her dad watched the children, Rosalie and I went out with one of her uncles and his wife for a special evening of relaxation and entertainment. We had wanted to see the famous Hollywood Boulevard and Vine Street intersection that marked the center of the motion picture industry at that time. After seeing the imprints of notable movie stars in the sidewalk, we went to dinner, and then to the Cinerama showing of Seven Wonders of the World. After the show, we stopped for coffee at a shop on the very corner of the famous intersection, and one of those highly improbable coincidences in life occurred.

We had no longer sat down in our booth than we were confronted by a very excited man from a neighboring table. It turned out that he had just spent much of his afternoon

[4] remember little of the 1957 Christmas holidays in the blur of the satellite work. Rosalie was in her third trimester of pregnancy. Fortunately, her parents visited us for a substantial interval that included Christmas. Their presence provided much needed help and interaction for Rosalie in the middle of her efforts to carry so many of the household and family responsibilities. We had our usual family celebration on Christmas Day. On New Year’s Day, Rosalie and I watched the Rose Bowl Parade on television. Although we were living less than a mile from the parade route, we decided to relax at home and not brave the crowds.

The designations, GM counter identification numbers, and dispositions of the four payloads were as shown in Table 10.1.

We had only two weeks to prepare the payloads for the new launch attempt. We immediately tackled the tape recorder difficulties that had been encountered during the Deal IIa Cape activities. I canceled my plans to go to the ABMA in Alabama that Thursday for work on a new IGY Heavy Payload being proposed, so that I could help with the Deal IIb instruments. Discussion of that new project is detailed in Chapter 14.

[6] discovered that the double-stepping that we had encountered with the Deal IIa tape recorder was due to overtravel of the tape-advance solenoid, and stops on the remaining recorders were adjusted to prevent a recurrence. We also spent consider­able time in fine-tuning other adjustments in the recorders to ensure more reliable operation.

As for the launch pad difficulties in interrogating the Deal IIa tape recorder, JPL engineers made many tests and analyses of the radio frequency system. These included two specific tests related to possible causes for loss of command receiver sensitivity.12 One was that the antenna radiation pattern might have been distorted. That effect was simulated and eliminated from further consideration. The second possibility was that receiver sensitivity might have been too low, at least partly a by-product of electrical noise generated by the spin motor for the upper-stage tub. That condition was also simulated, with the conclusion that it, in fact, might have been a factor. The command receiver sensitivity was increased, and other arrangements were made at the Cape for increasing the signal-to-noise ratio for the interrogation signal in the neighborhood of the launch gantry.

Several new problems surfaced during the second half of the week of 10 March. A resistor on deck “G” of the Environmental Test Payload IV failed and had to be replaced. That meant unwiring and removing that particular electronics deck from the instrument stack, digging through the foam encapsulation, replacing the resistor, recasting the foam, retesting the deck, reinstalling it in the stack and rewiring it, and

[7] There were no problems with the Explorer I primary mechanical structure or of its provisions for controlling its internal temperatures.

• Throughout the satellite’s operating lifetime, the performance of the State Uni­versity of Iowa (SUI)-designed scientific instrument consisting of the Geiger – Muller (GM) counter, its 700 volt power supply, and the binary scaling circuits was faultless.

• The low-power transmitter subsystem, including its associated subcarrier oscilla­tors, operated perfectly until the normal exhaustion of its batteries. That occurred on 13-14 April 1958, after two and a half months of continuous operation. Its design lifetime had been two months.

• The high-power transmitter and its associated subcarrier oscillators operated perfectly until the morning of 12 February. Its signal faded away gradually during the next day, with a last detectable but weak signal at 11:15 UT. That operating lifetime of nearly 12 days is only two days short of the system’s design lifetime of two weeks.

[8] High-Power System

о From 1 through 11 February, there was an average of 22 recordings per day. Once routine operations were established after the initial day, and un­til 8 February, the numbers varied in an essentially random pattern from 21 to 29 passes per day. During 9, 10, and 11 February, the rates were some­what lower, at 18-19 passes per day. That reduction was probably due to a small decrease in the transmitter output power due to decreasing battery voltage, combined with changes in orbital positions relative to the receiving stations.

о During the period from 24 through 27 February, that is, while the high – power transmitter was again sporadically operating, the recovery rate was much lower, at 4.8 passes per day. There were several reasons for that lower rate. Even though some of the Minitrack high-power signal receivers

[9] NRL Minitrack stations at Santiago, Chile; Antofagasta, Chile; Quito, Ecuador;

Havana, Cuba; Fort Stewart, Georgia; and Woomera, Australia

[10] remained at Cape Canaveral for about a week after the Explorer IV launch to begin preliminary preparations for the next attempt. Everyone wanted a second instrument in orbit before the nuclear detonations to provide the greatest probability of adequate coverage.

From 4 through 8 August, our family had a pleasant drive together in returning to Iowa City. Our laboratory was occupied with many last-minute preparations for data analysis and for the next launch. Pickering arrived on 9 August to discuss data reception, reduction, and dissemination. We increased the amount of lead shielding on one GM counter and put a small calibration source in one scintillation detector for that second launch.

On 13 and 14 August, it was back to Huntsville, and then to Cape Canaveral for final launch preparations. A countdown was started on 21 August but was canceled due to a leaky fuel valve on the booster rocket. On 22 August, there began a last – minute scramble to repair a problem in one of the spare flight payloads, so that there would be sufficient spares on hand to cover any eventuality. The next day, I took that spare to Huntsville for a vacuum test and returned it to Cape Canaveral. Meanwhile,

[11] received one year’s undergraduate credit for training that I had received in the Air Force—thus, I started in February 1953 with sophomore status. I took full 16 semester-hour loads the first three regular semesters but dropped back to 12 hour loads for the rest of my undergraduate studies because of my increasing workload in the Cosmic Ray Laboratory. In spite of that, by adding summer sessions in 1953 and 1955, I earned my B. A. degree in three calendar years, receiving it at the 14 February 1956 commencement ceremony.

My undergraduate years were very enjoyable. Although extremely busy, both my academic studies and the work in the laboratory were exciting, challenging, and rewarding. It was as though I had been preparing all my life for that situation. My teenage interest in electronics, my communications and radar training in the Air Force, and the broadening effect of widespread travel, officer training, piloting, and management in the Air Force all served to prepare me for the new environment.

As I neared the end of my undergraduate work, I struggled with an important question. I felt that I should broaden my experience by going to a different school for my graduate studies. I began looking for another situation where I could attend college and also find acceptable work to help support my family. My most sub­stantive effort in that regard was an inquiry in March 1956 to the Missile Systems Division of the Lockheed Aircraft Corporation in California about their Advanced